Fans to return...

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
They could well be, but most if not all of their previous postings have been related to ground safety.
I am happy to share anything I can, and give reasoned responses to anything on this forum. You only need to ask originallambrettaman who knows me well. The only thing I can’t do is disclose anything discussed at meetings unless it is minuted and in the public domain. That is what the Freedom of Information Act is for. I fully support the return of fans to the KCOM and will do everything within the guidelines and legislation to make it happen.
 
Last edited:
I am happy to share anything I can, and give reasoned responses to anything on this forum. You only need to ask originallambrettaman who knows me well. The only thing I can’t do is disclose anything discussed at meetings unless it is minuted and in the public domain. That is what the Freedom of Information Act is for. I fully support the return of fans to the KCOM and do everything within the guidelines and legislation to make it happen.

Cheers bud.

I'll just nudge the only genuine question I've seen asked, which relates to the events around the pulling out of the covid trial.

So what did happen then?
 
I am happy to share anything I can, and give reasoned responses to anything on this forum. You only need to ask originallambrettaman who knows me well. The only thing I can’t do is disclose anything discussed at meetings unless it is minuted and in the public domain. That is what the Freedom of Information Act is for. I fully support the return of fans to the KCOM and do everything within the guidelines and legislation to make it happen.

I can confirm that I do know him and that he’s a decent bloke, who I’m sure will be able to shed some light on how the decision was made.
 
I can confirm that I do know him and that he’s a decent bloke, who I’m sure will be able to shed some light on how the decision was made.

ITK poster says it was one woman who works for the council used her position to get back at the Allams to the detriment of hundreds of their workers and potentially thousands of supporters. Nothing more than petty vindictiveness.
 
ITK poster says it was one woman who works for the council used her position to get back at the Allams to the detriment of hundreds of their workers and potentially thousands of supporters. Nothing more than petty vindictiveness.
Just goes to prove that these forums are a place for speculation, opinion and not facts
 
ITK poster says it was one woman who works for the council used her position to get back at the Allams to the detriment of hundreds of their workers and potentially thousands of supporters. Nothing more than petty vindictiveness.

Staging the game with fans would have cost the Allams, if the council wanted to be vindictive, then letting it go ahead would have been a better option.

Sagman is Safety & Emergency Planning Manager at Hull City Council and is chair of the KCOM Safety Advisory Group, he obviously knows more about how the decision was made than anyone else on here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: balkan tiger
Staging the game with fans would have cost the Allams, if the council wanted to be vindictive, then letting it go ahead would have been a better option.

Sagman is Safety & Emergency Planning Manager at Hull City Council and is chair of the KCOM Safety Advisory Group, he obviously knows more about how the decision was made than anyone else on here.

So you're stating categorically,as fact,that the Allams didn't spend any money organising and researching the event?
 
You stated that the event "would have cost the Allams" and if the Council wanted to be vindictive then letting it to ahead would've been a better option?

My point was,and still is,the money would've already been spent.
I assume (not a FACT) that he was talking about staffing costs which are obviously proportionally higher for less supporters, and I imagine would have been high to manage things too
 
Just goes to prove that these forums are a place for speculation, opinion and not facts

Any figures on infection rates compared to Hull where games did go ahead like Middlesbrough and Norwich? And why, if they were similar or worse, they got the go ahead and we didn't? Also why Walton St Market where there was less social distancinng and an absence of masks could go ahead?
 
I assume (not a FACT) that he was talking about staffing costs which are obviously proportionally higher for less supporters, and I imagine would have been high to manage things too

Exactly, the club would receive no extra income as members have already paid and I believe the bars have to be closed for the pilot events, so there' s no extra income at all. And though there were only about 600 fans due to be invited, they were to be spread across the whole ground and distancing had to be enforced, so it was likely that almost a full compliment of stewards would be required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dennisboothstash
Exactly, the club would receive no extra income as members have already paid and I believe the bars have to be closed for the pilot events, so there' s no extra income at all. And though there were only about 600 fans due to be invited, they were to be spread across the whole ground and distancing had to be enforced, so it was likely that almost a full compliment of stewards would be required.

Same applies to the other places where games went ahead.
 
Staging the game with fans would have cost the Allams, if the council wanted to be vindictive, then letting it go ahead would have been a better option.

Sagman is Safety & Emergency Planning Manager at Hull City Council and is chair of the KCOM Safety Advisory Group, he obviously knows more about how the decision was made than anyone else on here.
According to you.
 
Exactly, the club would receive no extra income as members have already paid and I believe the bars have to be closed for the pilot events, so there' s no extra income at all. And though there were only about 600 fans due to be invited, they were to be spread across the whole ground and distancing had to be enforced, so it was likely that almost a full compliment of stewards would be required.
The club wanted the game played and you are forgetting they were invited by the EFL, only one of 10 clubs as a trial run. It was never intended to make money from it.
Out of the ten, two clubs declined because of the work involved leaving eight other clubs, only one council stepped into to put the mockers on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nbetiger
Status
Not open for further replies.